Jeep 4.0 in 69 Barracuda

JohnFM3 said
txstang, please understand that I am in no way offended by your explaining your stance. I do agree, not wanting to Argue. I am listening and in many cases having to go back and google search things based on whats being said. Hence it may take some time to respond as I want to make sure what I am trying to explain of my thoughts is clear. I do thank you for taking the time to talk this out. I believe this to be a very productive conversation for the project which will be coming around the corner really soon. Thanks for taking the time and interest to discuss this with me.

Excellent--too many times, even up to recently, I was dumb enough to engage a fruitless argument...not trying to do that here.

As much as I believe that there are manufactures which built a Programmable adaptive ODB1 such as the Ford you explained. It is my belief that Chry/Jeep did not. In example, if you build too big of a Jeep inline 6 Stroker (much pass 4.9L) with to many changes, the ECU will never run it correctly and a new ECU is required. Especially if you consider the 5.2L with the custom offset grind crank. Yes it will run, but not correctly. Many threads on this topic have been posted on JeepForum.

It just seems counterintuitive to me that one manufacturer would use that readily accepted variability within the technology, and another wouldn't...but we are talking about an auto industry seemingly run by bean counters...sigh...but, if you've seen it on Jeep forums where people have taken this route modifying their engines and been sorely disappointed or required a new EFI system, then you're already ahead of me there...but you are talking about stroking it...I was only talking about the exhaust part...more on that below...

As such, its in my belief that the by going with a 94 Jeep Wrangler ODB1 ecu (though convenient) does mean I have to remain with in certain criteria. And to what started this conversation off being about Exhaust systems. I do believe that I need to look at what aftermarket suppliers are providing for solutions, but keep with in the realm of what their researchers have found to be the best solution for performance and driveabiltiy. Now yes I am being somewhat adaptive because I have the space to consider a dual 1.75 setup vs sticking to a single exhaust. And that should flow almost as well as a full 2.5 inch exhaust which is still bigger than the stock which is mostly 2.25.

Now, the exhaust bit though--I still believe that if you opened up the exhaust to a modest system where you have your two head pipes into a single 2.5" or even a 3", the computer can compensate for that change. In the big picture, changing it only uncorks the resistance, which *may* create a felt difference somewhere in the low or midrange, but the engine is still only going to function within its own intrinsic capabilities...the induction will still only allow so much air in, the cam and valvetrain will still limit your top end to about 5K RPM...it'll just breathe a little better throughout that range.